The effect of urbanisation and seasonality on wild bee abundance, body size and foraging efforts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anthropogenic changes highly impact the world's biodiversity. An important human‐driven change to natural environments is increasing urbanisation, which is responsible for decreasing suitable habitats for many wild species, including bees. In this study, we investigate if three levels of urbanisation (low, medium and high) affect body size, foraging efforts and abundance of the sweat bee Agapostemon virescens . Overall, A. virescens was more abundant in medium‐urbanised sites. Second‐generation females (summer bees) were more abundant than overwintered (spring bees) at all levels of urbanisation. According to body size, female bees were larger in highly urbanised sites and male bees were larger in medium‐urbanised sites. According to foraging efforts, we observed an increase in wing wear during spring and a decrease during summer. It was also found a female‐biased sex ratio under high urbanisation and a male‐biased in low urbanisation sites. Our results suggest that highly urbanised sites can still provide sufficient nesting and foraging resources for A. virescens . In addition to our findings of higher bee abundance in low and medium urbanised sites, we suggest that maintaining different levels of urbanisation and heterogenous landscapes within a populous city might have a more positive impact on wild be sustainability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".